Patent Litigation

News & Analysis as of

Patent Safe Harbor Applies to Supplemental New Drug Applications

On May 13, 2015, the Federal Circuit confirmed in Classen Immunotherapies, Inc. v. Elan Pharmaceuticals, Inc. that the safe harbor provisions of 35 U.S.C. § 271(e)(1) can shield post-FDA approval activities from liability for...more

The Judge Next Door

Corning Optical Communications Wireless Ltd. v. Solid, Inc. et al., 5:14-cv-03750 (Magistrate Paul Grewal) (May 13, 2015) - It is common to have discovery disputes in patent litigation, and parties often resolve such...more

Motion for Judgment on the Pleadings Based on Section 101 Denied Where Defendant Failed to Include Challenge in Invalidity...

In this patent infringement action between Plaintiffs Good Technology Corporation and Good Technology Software, Inc. ("Good) and Defendant MobileIron, Inc. ("MobileIron"). Two months before the trial, MobileIron moved to...more

Apple-Samsung Trade Dress Case Demonstrates Potential Value of Design Patents

A jury awarded Apple more than $1 billion in damages after finding that smartphones sold by Samsung diluted Apple's trade dress and infringed Apple's design and utility patents. After a partial retrial limited to determining...more

Nearly Expired Is Not the Same as Expired: The Board Clarifies Claim Construction Standards for Inter Partes Review - Apple, Inc....

Addressing the standard to be applied for claim construction during inter partes review (IPR) proceedings, the U.S. Patent and Trademark Office’s (PTO) Patent Trial and Appeal Board (PTAB or Board) declined to create an...more

IP Dispute Resolution Review Newsletter, Spring 2015

In This Issue: - The New “Clear Error” Standard of Review in Patent Infringement Mediation - Trademark Trial Appeal Board Decisions Now Have Preclusive Effect - Engaging Panelists for Neutral Analysis Provides...more

District Court Denies Motion to Compel and for Sanctions Where CFO Could Not Be Compelled to Testify on Broad Deposition Topics...

Plaintiff Stoneeagle Services, Inc. ("Stoneeagle") filed a motion seeking sanctions against Defendant Premier Healthcare Exchange, Inc. ("PHX") for failing to provide a prepared corporate representative to testify pursuant to...more

Federal Circuit Finds No Direct Infringement of Akamai Patents

The Federal Circuit issued its remand decision in Akamai Technologies, Inc. v. Limelight Networks, Inc., this time affirming the district court decision that Limelight was not liable for infringing Akamai’s patents because...more

An Exercise of Business Judgment: Chancery Court Dismisses Shareholder Derivative Demand-Refused Case

Last week, Vice Chancellor Glasscock released an important decision dismissing a case under Rule 23.1 that was brought by a DuPont shareholder who alleged that the board improperly refused a demand to sue DuPont’s officers...more

IPR Privity Analysis Includes Post-Complaint Period - VMWare, Inc. v. Good Technology Software, Inc.

Clarifying the privity requirement for inter partes review (IPR) petitions, the U.S. Patent and Trademark Office (PTO) Patent Trial and Appeal Board (PTAB or Board) explained that privity should be determined looking at the...more

Filing Waiver of Service Triggers One-Year IPR Bar Date - The Brinkmann Corporation v. A&J Manufacturing

Addressing the issue of standing to present a petition, the Patent Trial and Appeal Board (PTAB or Board) granted institution of an inter partes review (IPR), finding that the petition filed within one year of filing waiver...more

Federal Circuit Finds No Direct Infringement Where Limelight's Customer—and Not Limelight—Performs Required Step of Method Claim

On May 13, 2015, a divided Federal Circuit held that Limelight did not infringe Akamai's asserted method claim because Limelight did not perform all steps of the asserted method claims, and because there was no foundation on...more

Court Report - May 2015 #3

About Court Report: Each week we will report briefly on recently filed biotech and pharma cases. Horizon Pharma, Inc. et al. v. Actavis Laboratories FL., Inc. et al. 3:15-cv-03322; filed May 13, 2015 in the District...more

Direct Infringement Has Its Turn in the Limelight

Akamai’s Return to the Federal Circuit - In the latest round of the long-running saga of Akamai Technologies, Inc. v. Limelight Networks, Inc., a Federal Circuit panel on Wednesday reiterated that there is no direct...more

Another One Bites the Dust: Action Dismissed for Lack of Standing Where Plaintiff Could Not Prove Ownership of the Patent-In-Suit

America's Collectibles Network ("ACN") filed a patent infringement action in which it claimed to own U.S. Patent No. 8,370,211 (the "211 Patent"). It brought this action against the Genuine Gemstone Company ("Genuine...more

Locke Lord QuickStudy: Means-Plus-Function Software Claims - Always, Always, (Almost) Always Disclose an Algorithm

On May 6, 2015, the Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit issued its decision in EON Corp. IP Holdings LLC v. AT&T Mobility LLC, 2014-1393, clarifying that for meeting the definiteness requirement of claims, a general...more

Federal Circuit to Consider International Patent Exhaustion En Banc - Lexmark International, Inc. v. Impression Products, Inc.

The U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit has sua sponte ordered an en banc hearing to consider the issue of international patent exhaustion. Lexmark International, Inc. v. Impression Products, Inc., Case No. 14-1617...more

First Look at False Marking Under the AIA

In Sukumar v. Nautilus, Inc., the Federal Circuit took its first look at the standing requirements to bring a false marking case under the American Invents Act (AIA). The court rejected Nautilus’ arguments that only “market...more

Patent Litigation Fee Awards: Hourly-Based Lodestar Trumps AFAs

Now that it is easier for prevailing parties in a patent litigation to recover attorney fees [see our previous post], how likely is that that fees paid under some form of non-hourly arrangement – for example flat fees,...more

Patent Case: Federal Circuit Provides Guidance On Direct Infringement (Akamai V. Limelight)

Today, a Federal Circuit panel, Judges Prost, Linn (author) and Moore (dissent), issued its long-awaited decision in the Akamia v. Limelight case following remand from the Supreme Court to consider the issue of multiple-actor...more

Fairchild v. Power Integrations: Because of Right to Appeal, District Court Precludes Reference to Pending Reexamination...

Fairchild Semiconductor Corp. and Fairchild (Taiwan) Corp.'s (collectively, "Fairchild") moved in limine to preclude any reference to any pending reexamination proceeding or any completed reexamination proceeding of any...more

PUBLIC VERSION Of Judge Essex ITC Decision That Nokia Phones Infringe Interdigital’s 3GPP Patents (337-TA-613)

Following the prior notice of decision (see our Apr. 27, 2015 post), the Public Version is now available of Administrative Law Judge (ALJ) Essex’s Initial Determination On Remand that Nokia mobile phones infringe...more

Globus Argues Expert’s Faked Credentials Warrants New Trial

In 2011, DePuy-Synthes, a subsidiary of Johnson & Johnson Inc. sued Globus Medical, Inc. in the United States District Court for the District of Delaware. In that suit, Synthes alleged that Globus had infringed three Synthes...more

Lessons in Personal Jurisdiction for BPCIA Litigants after the Supreme Court’s decision in Daimler

An emerging issue in Hatch-Waxman litigation – and potentially under the Biologics Price Competition and Innovation Act (BPCIA) – is the impact of the Supreme Court’s decision in Daimler AG v. Bauman, 134 S. Ct.746 (2014), on...more

Declaratory Judgment of Non-Infringement of a Disclaimed Patent Warranted in Hatch-Waxman - Apotex Inc. v. Daiichi Sankyo, Inc.

Addressing the issue of subject matter jurisdiction in Hatch-Waxman litigation, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit reversed a district court’s dismissal for lack of case or controversy of an action seeking...more

2,000 Results
|
View per page
Page: of 80

All the intelligence you need, in one easy email:

Great! Your first step to building an email digest of JD Supra authors and topics. Log in with LinkedIn so we can start sending your digest...

Sign up for your custom alerts now, using LinkedIn ›

* With LinkedIn, you don't need to create a separate login to manage your free JD Supra account, and we can make suggestions based on your needs and interests. We will not post anything on LinkedIn in your name.
×